Quality Control Section Anyone?

Talk very nicely to the guys in Admin - if they decide you've put forward a strong enough case for a new section, they may help.

As things are arranged at present, you can't set up your own section.

That would be a good section to start. I am in Validation so the QA /QC/Validation might be a good place to spill our frustrations.

You really don't want such a narrow section as QC or QA. Far too much clutter and confusion, for sure. Think it through and check other discussions on the topic...I feel you will soon agree.

It's like saying, why don't we have a section for headaches?

Also, the concept behind discussion sections is going from general to specific, not the other way around...which leads to rambling and headaches.

NARROW !? What the - I can't let that one slide.................

I too thought Quality Control was the "just bitch about everything " department until I got a few months of inspections and a customer audit under my belt. Engineering and Production departments get you in business, Quality departments keep you in business. Every part I inspect has a team of three engineers working on it and a supervisor and manager over them. QA/QC is not narrow I can assure you. I have a new found respect for this field.

Sounds like a pretty good idea to me, especially if it included NDT.

I too handle the roll of QCM at the paper mill I work at and would like to see a section for this. I think it would have to include all types of NDT because that is the main tool that determines if the quality is there in most applications. Are you talking about ASME, API fabrication QA section or a more broader QA section for all materials and other types manufacturing?

pipewelder

Yes, Yes, everything - various applied metrics to SPC to test equipment, ASTM Specifications - the works.

However, as "Guest" pointed out - maybe not too specific.

But "Quality" can be and "IS" such a vast qualification for manufacturing, service, communication, etc. that being specific would hardly apply.

My QC policies and procedures will differ greatly from yours Pipewelder but the concepts are relitively the same.

PLEASE more feedback!!

That is where a lot of losses have happened. Management has looked to quality to be the one to inter-fear with manufacturing, but it is an integral part. Working in a food type manufacturing area, even the production of 1 item must have a quality program in place. We are seeing all over the news theses days about quality, maintenance and inspection from planes to cranes. These programs have to be in place and in operation to keep both the workers and consumers safe.

My area of quality assurance and management is with steel, Plastic, fiberglass, tile chests, tanks, boiler pressure vessels and the fabrication, repair and welding associated with maintaining these. I am also a project manager and in the mill management team so I have to weigh every decision I make with the consequences of what it will cause. My job is held only a few inches above my head so common sense is paramount. When I say this I know also the responsibility I can put on my own back is great. One of the worst parts of my job is making the unpopular decisions that cause loss of production or large expenditures of capital and expense monies. When you make decisions that impact someone else's bottom line they may be required to do it but they won't like you much from then on. I would like to hear what others run into and ways they have came up with to deal with the many issues that can arise when they do their QA work.

pipewelder

My current area of quality assurance and management is with carbon steel pipeline pipe. I am currently working as the RSO (Radiation Safety Officer) in a very old large diameter pipe manufacturing plant. I deal mainly with radiography, but we perform visual, magnetic particle, liquid dye penetrant, and ultrasonics of the welds and body of the pipe. I know how you feel pipewelder about making unpopular decisions that can stop production or that may cost very large amounts of monies. I am forever pushing safety and quality, but the "bean counters" are forever pushing production. The way I justify the cost of my equipment and personnel is that the newer the equipment the less chance for breakdowns and maintenance, and the more qualified personnel, the less mistakes and the need to rerun the pipe. I do have to step on a few toes now and then or raise my voice to the other supervisors or managers to get my point across, and yes they get upset or maybe even hold a grudge for awhile, but in the end they get over it.They know thats what I get paid to do, and after it is all over, they know it takes us all to run this mill. I have been asked on many occasions.."What do you do for a living"? My response.."I pi$$ people off"!

Again, my point exactly - this area goes far beyond six sigma, ISO, etc.

Although the aforementioned programs serve their purpose, it's about actual QC/QA that we as the QCM's deal with everyday.

I been in this field in one form or another through out my career and yet when I took on my new position with a new company, it's like I was starting from scratch! There is SO much to cover that even a simple thing like time management or multitasking becomes a chore since everyday is a learning experience (of coarse, that's what makes it fun!).

It's wonderful to have a venue like this, to seek good answers and direction from other experienced professionals - even the smallest detail makes a difference!

You're the manager. Create one of your own.

In a fabrication shop the quality control is pretty much confined to inspection of parts.

What kind of fab shop do you have? Is it Fred and Barney Technology where every part is individually made and passes through a few different hands like from the shear guy to the detail guy to the press break guy to the welders? What are the tolerances that are specified on your drawings.

Do you go over the drawings to ensure that your rocket scientist engineers are getting all the information needed on the drawings so the fabricators can't possibly not misread the information. It's my experience that fabrication personnel are of a higher caliber in work ethic then engineers so engineers have to be watched closely.

You have to look to resolve errors at the earliest point in the process. Sometimes you have to be persistent and drag a production manager in for support and be prepared to present your case because engineers are very reluctant to make any changes to their work, even if it means removing some non-functional slots and holes from parts that are obsolete.

You have to create your own set of SOP if the company doesn't have a set already. They have to be ratified by upper management or they will just go away like a fad.

Great stuff!

Except I'm asking about creating a CR4 Section of discussion.

I would like to see a section created so that QCM's, Cal Techs, Inspectors (AWS-CWI) can exchange ideas.

I have a program in place that is IAS accredited -

After spending the last couple of years in Quality, I would love to see a devoted "Quality" section that is broad in scope and non-specific. This section could capture all the quality type post that would normally go to other sections and possibly never seen.

Could we (can we already) do a dual post?

Example:Route it to say Manufacturing AND Quality or have a re-direct initiated?

I learn as much or more from the "non-quality" types when doing process improvement because they think outside the box. It would be great to get everyones input on issues.

This sounds like a great idea! I am a synthetic organic chemist who has now found himself appointed QA/QC Director at a liquid dish soap manufacturing facility. Prior training and experience have had little to do with QA/QC and it's not likely that I'll get any formal education in this regard. It would be nice to have a forum where I could learn from others much more knowledgeable in QA/QC than I am. Thanks.

This is exactly what I'm referring to - I don't have a clue what to set up as a program for your application - but, I do know what it takes in mine.

I can give you specifics on what is important to cover off on and would also recomend that you check to see who you would use as an accredited agency to validate and in most cases, establish your parameters (most often the agencies have industry specific parameters in place that are in outline form).

Now, with all this being said, I believe QC/QA should be considered as an add to the sections.

Anybody know how I contact the "Powers that be" to convince them?

I believe this string to be a positive point to "our" request.

Thank-you all!

Any more input??

"Anybody know how I contact the "Powers that be" to convince them?"

I think you'll find that this thread has already been noticed, but if you want the direct approach, try a PM to Lead Editor Chris Leonard

Thank-you!

Thank-you!

(I was hoping this thread would be noticed!)

Thank-you to all!!

Camilliontwo1, I'm with you and almost all posted before. Just let me think loud:

QA/QC as I see it has changed a lot in the last 30 years. Common industries used to talk about QC and only few industries (aerospace, military, nuclear) talked abut both, QC and QA. Then those who worked in that field were looked as a pain in the ass for production/manufacturing or even design sections. In my experience, some QC people was responsible for that situation: They thought their task were to act as a "notary", just saying if something complied or not with whatever some paper said. (they could reject a dog because the procedure said dogs must fly)... No critical thought.

I had to work hardly to change the mind of such "inspectors" because in my opinion, an QA/QC inspector must have a deep knowledge of all aspects about the thing he's inspecting. It's the only way to get the respect of any other people when your decision is to reject the inspected thing. In that case you shouldn't limit your work to say "this is not acceptable", but technically explain why it isn't and the easy, or some ways to achieve the expected results. Then, that production/manufacturing/design people can look at you as a contributor to their success.

We have get a major respect doing things so, and even in some cases, we are consulted before something has to be done, in order to avoid rejections.

But unfortunately, I think the situation is going back from few years ago, and it's curious that has coincided with the growing "market" of quality systems certification.

Bean counters have take over the power in many companies and they deal with QA/QC as a "marketing issue".

An example: We purchased some electrical panels to a multinational well known company (our supplier) for a power plant (our customer). We did the design/specification for the panels. Our supplier had to prepare wiring diagrams and some other documentation for our approval. We did comments to such documents and when our QC inspector was to the workshop to make the final inspection, he realized that our comments weren't take into account, so the panels didn't comply with our requirements. After hard discussions, the inspector reported to me the facts asking for help. I decided to call the supplier QA manager for a meeting and when I explained him the situation, he wide opened his eyes and asked me: How do you inspect our product? We are ISO 9001 certified!

The next weekend in the economical section of the news I could read the appointment of such individual as QA manager of such company. The news included a brief history of the individual, he had spent all his working life in marketing services!!!

Anyway, I will be in that QC section.

Best regards

So it appears we are all in one accord with this subject. I think we can all agree " how do we have the money or time to do it over, if we don't have the time or money to do it right the first time?" By the sound of peoples voices , we are passionate about our work. That is why we are in this field. I say lets run with it!!

Hi, Camilliontwo1!

As the old saying goes, be careful about what you wish for, or you may get it.

If the powers that be at CR4 allow you to start up such a blog, because they think it looks like there might be sufficient interest...they would expect it to be maintained by somebody; and since you suggested it, probably expect you would be the one to keep it going... which (again maybe) means you'd personally be submitting a few posts a month to it.

The taking-up-your-time factor might be a consideration.

There is a place in this section as well as other places in CR4, for submitting ideas about starting a discussion to the CR4 folks.

Good luck if you get the gig. I'll be looking in on it to pick up the odd pointer and learn a little about the field.

Mark

Well thanks for the heads up - I wouldn't have a problem with it (submitting frequently).

I feel if that requirement allows us to provide information that is utilized by all or some, hey, it's worth it.

I've learned a lot by others experience.

Remember, it's not what you know but where to go to learn...

To all - I submitted to Mr. Leonard and he was quite receptive.

He explained that they will be doing an upgrade in July and will add something, either under manufacturing or as a stand alone.

Thank-you for all your input!

Be watching for it - I do believe it will benefit all, especially the QCM's of the world!

A bunch of quality people together . Sounds great. I think Mr. Franklin said it best!

"We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."

-- Benjamin Franklin (at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, 4 July 1776)